Abstract
The noise power spectrum (NPS) is one of the most general methods for measuring the noise amplitude and the quality of an image acquired from a uniform radiation field. The purpose of this study was to compare different NPS methodologies by using megavoltage X-ray energies. The NPS evaluation methods in diagnostic radiation were applied to therapy using the International Electrotechnical Commission standard (IEC 62220-1). In order to measure the region of interest (ROI) of the NPS, we used the following five factors: the overlapping impact, the non-overlapping impact, the penumbra, the flatness and different ROI sizes. We used NPS from four different types of detectors, the CR-IP (computed radiography image plate: photo-stimulable phosphor screen), the CR-IP-lead (hexalon lead screen), the CR-IP-back [lanex TM fast back screen: {terbium-doped gadolinium oxysulfide granular phosphor screen (Gd2O2S:Tb,133 mg/cm2)} + 1-mm-thick copper plate and the CR-IP-front (lanex TM fast front screen). A Kodak 2000 RT photo-stimulable phosphor-based computed radiographic (CR) system showed that the normalized noise power spectrum (NNPS) curve gradually decreased, in compliance with increasing spatial resolution. In addition, each detector showed a different reactivity of the NPS to megavoltage. The results of multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) test (methods × detectors) revealed significant main effects of the methods [F(1, 4) = 53.543, P = 0.001 and of the detectors [F(1, 4) = 17.556, P = 0.001]. The present study revealed that various factors could be employed to produce megavoltage imaging (MVI) of the NPS and as a baseline standard for NPS control in MVI.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
H. S. Park, H. M. Cho, J. Jung, C. L. Lee and H. J. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 54, 236 (2009).
H. S. Cho, S. G. Ghoi, B. S. Lee and S. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 51, 30 (2007).
E. Samei and M. J. Flynn, Med. Phys. 29, 447 (2002).
E. Samei, N. T. Ranger, J. T. Dobbins III and Y. Chen, Med. Phys. 33, 1454 (2006).
H. S. Cho, S. I. Choi, K. Y. Kim, M. H. Nam, D. E. Kim, G. T. Joo and S. C. Lee, J. Korean Phys. Soc. 51, 35 (2007).
E. Samei and M. J. Flynn, Med. Phys. 30, 608 (2003).
N. Pongnapang, Biomed. Imaging Intervention J. 1, e12 (2005).
O. Rampado, P. Isoardi and R. Ropolo, Phys. Med. Biol. 51, 1577 (2006).
M. J. Flyun and E. Samei, Med. Phys. 30, 608 (2003).
J. T. Dobbins III, D. L. Ergun, L. Rutz, D. A. Hinshaw, H. Blume and D. C. Clark, Med. Phys. 22, 1581 (1995).
H. M. Cho, H. J. Kim, C. L. Lee, S. Nam and J. Y. Jung, Proc. IEEE M19-199, 3840 (2007).
H. Illers, E. Buhr and C. Hoeschen, Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 114, 39 (2005).
J. T. Dobbisn III, E. Samei, N. T. Ranger and Y. Chen, Med. Phys. 33, 1466 (2006).
M. J. Flyun and E. Samei, Med. Phys. 26, 1612 (1999).
R. Nath, P. J. Biggs, F. J. Bova, C. C Ling, J. A. Purdy, J. V. D. Geijn and M. S. Weinhous, Med. Phys. 21, 1093 (1994).
P. F. Judy, Med. Phys. 3, 233 (1976).
I. A. Cunningham and A. Fenster, Med. Phys. 14, 533 (1987).
E. Samei, M. J. Flynn and D. A. Reimann, Med. Phys. 25, 102 (1998).
E. G. Buhr, S. Gunther-Kohfahl and U. Neitzel, Med. Phys. 30, 2323 (2003).
C. E. Metz and K. Doi, Phys. Med. Biol. 24, 1079 (1979).
H. Fujita, D. Tsai, T. Itoh, K. Doi, J. Morishita, K. Ueda and A. Ohtsuka, IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 11, 34 (1992).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Min, JW., Son, JH., Jeong, HW. et al. Comparison of noise power spectrum methodologies in measurements by using megavoltage X-ray energies. Journal of the Korean Physical Society 60, 129–136 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.60.129
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.60.129